Mazda’s small minivan will disappear for 2015, as compact crossover sales eat into the shrinking market share of the Mazda5.
According to Automotive News, the Mazda5 will be replaced by both the upcoming Mazda CX-3 small crossover, while the CX-5 and three-row CX-9 will complement its size and people-carrying capabilities.
Despite its cult following, sales of the 5 have been marginal, with just under 14,000 units sold in 2013. In its best year, Mazda sold just 22,000 examples. While other Mazda products have been given new, more efficient Skyactiv engines and lightweight technology, the 5 has languished with an antiquated powertrain and little in the way of updates since its 2010 redesign.
Although the CX-5 won’t be able to seat 6 or have sliding doors, it will likely continue with the Mazda5’s main quirk: a manual transmission.
That stinks, I kinda liked these, or at least the idea of them.
Welcome to the B&B, then. Have a “brown AWD 6-spd-manual diesel station wagon under $45K” button.
Just to clarify: I don’t actually know if you’re new here or not, but I mean welcome since you’ve now expressed an opinion in line with the majority of the B&B.
Well, not exactly new- I think Fall of 2010. But as far as car choices go-
1991 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser Wagon with the 305 and about 26 horsepower. But so many MPG! So, yes. I tend to fall in that crowd.
I can comprehend “AWD 6-spd-manual diesel station wagon “. Why does so many crave brown color? I been here on and off for 3-4 years but I cannot figure out the brown part. Is it because most manufacturers don’t offer brown exterior color? Curious.
It was small and pleasant but it wouldn’t be something I wished to own. I remember renting one sometime in 07 or 08 due to the car being in the shop and them just throwing one at me. It was an alright vehicle, no real faults to complain about. But being a tiny minivan in a country that wants big minivans that have huge markups for dealer installed goodies just isn’t going to sell.
That’s mostly it–the fact that brown is almost unheard outside of luxury-trim pickup trucks would make such a vehicle all the rarer, and therefore more desirable in this case.
But really, the whole “brown AWD 6-spd-manual diesel station wagon under $45K” thing is just a big in-joke now.
Brown was a popular color in the 60s and 70s that left the automotive color palette as it was considered sales poison in the 80s, 90s, and early 00s. Automotive purists on the internets have insisted that what the world needs is a diesel powered manual transmission station wagon (also a guaranteed sales dud), and the feature set was extended to offering such an unsellahle vehicle in brown to complete its undesirability. It has become an inside joke here at TTAC, and refers in a humorous way to the rather zany notion that a brown diesel powered manual transmission station wagon is the cure to all the automotive ills. SUVs, CUVs, and most minivans would disappear from the market once the unwashed masses realized what they were missing. The idea is preposterous of course, but darned if VW doesn’t come awfully close with a configuration of their Jetta TDI Sportwagon.
The Germans started offering cars in metallic brown shades in the late 00s and the color is now coming back into vogue after a twenty year hiatus. But Americans have voted with their wallets and station wagons are shunned for CUVs, and 96% of all new cars are equipped with an automatic transmission. Diesel still remains a niche that probably won’t enjoy more than a slight improvement in sales in the coming years. Brown however just might catch on, as Hipsters flock to anything that their parents detest.
Or more simply:
– Brown is ugly.
– The majority of people don’t like ugly.
– Hipsters must be unique, and deliberately seek out ugly because no one else will have it.
– Car enthusiasts are hipsters.
I love how in the US a diesel manual estate car would be a sales dud, but they’re insanely common in Europe. Very different markets…
Too bad about the Mazda5 – I liked it’s size and functionality, although they should have increased it 2 inches in each direction and maybe jacked up it’s premium-ness.
The old MPV as well as Quest/Villager twins really were a perfect size for those who don’t want a full size van.
This would be a perfect niche for Subaru to fill…
I’ve got a 2008. No other car of its size with sliding doors. Sad to hear this but not surprised. Really like the way it handles and was hoping they would keep it around long enough to replace mine when the time comes. Not sure what I’d replace it with since the sliding doors were a great selling point since I’ve got a family. I wonder what the B&B suggests as a good replacement?
2014 Odyssey EX.
LaneWatch, power sliding doors, backup camera, eight-passenger seating, and touchscreen radio for under 30 grand with discounts.
Too big. My wife is the primary driver and liked the smaller size of the Mazda. I’ll just have to keep it as long as I can I guess.
Small, sliding doors? Then I would recommend a 1st generation Dodge Caravan, a chest full of tools, and a lot of patience. Just remember, airbags are for sissies and what is a family vacation without at least one breakdown?
But yes I agree with you. Modern “mini”vans are too big. If I wanted something the size of a cargo van I would get a cargo van.
Yeah, pretty much have to compromise on the sliding doors. Good thing I plan on keeping it for a while. Don’t want a crossover but that is where the market is going. I have to agree that the Odyessy is the closest to what I would by next but my wife is afraid she would smash into everything due to the size. My budget would be pretty low which is what attracted me to the Mazda in the first place. Oh well, I’ll keep my eyes open.
My mom had an MPV, which was more of a CX-9 predecessor than a 5 one. Those things are bigger deathtraps than the 5. No side airbags, at all. They’re insanely cheap though.
Transit Connect (non-panel version).
If you can find one. That un-minivan campaign ain’t impressing dealers. Only new TCs near me are panel vans.
Try a Chrysler/Dodge minivan.
We had a 5, but had to sell it and buy on Odyssey due to unexpected arrival of twins (we already had a toddler). The 5 was simply too small. The wife chose an Odyssey because it has thee-across seating in the second row.
The Chrysler T&C I drove (as well as the Dodge Carravan I had as a loaner while the Odyssey was being serviced) feels much narrower than the Odyssey, yet they are definitely bigger than the 5.
Whereas the 5 drove like it was the Miata of minivans, the Chrysler/Dodge drive like they are the BMWs of minivans. The Odyssey feels like grandpa’s Buick.
The Chrysler definitely had better steering feel and response compared to the Odyssey, but the Honda’s overall refinement led us to choose it to supplement our 5.
The 5 is(was) hampered by it’s “people or stuff” preposition. We bought our 5 in anticipation of eventually having one kid, not twins. It served us well and will continue to do so, but the Oddy is our main family hauler now.
Something happens to the 5, I’ll probably replace it with a Golf or GTI.
“I wonder what the B&B suggests as a good replacement?”
SWB Transit Connect passenger version, but you will be paying probably $5K more for something not as good.
A big problem for the Mazda 5 is that it is made in Japan, so 1) it is expensive to produce, and 2) a panel version, which could do well against the Transit Connect and NV200, would face the chicken tax.
I wasn’t thinking of the Transit Connect but know nothing about the passenger options. I think I browsed the Ford site when it came out. If the visibility is good and the storage space is decent I might just look into one.
To get a Transit Connect with the same equipment (but more space) than the our fully equipped Grand Touring 5 would have been around $30k. That’s mid-trim money for the Honda, Toyota or Nissan. And fully loaded Caravan or base Town and Country.
And it still doesn’t have the room or versatility of the giantvans. A 22k Grand Caravan would be a better value, plus Pentstar power to boot.
The Transit Connect LWB got a decent review on Consumer Reports with a score of 76. They got 21mpg overall, similar to what I get driving with the 5 in primarily city driving.
Pros: handling, ride, visibility, access
Cons: 0-60 in 10.9 seconds, folding seat design, fit & finish, fewer features compared to bigger vans (power doors, leather, navigation)
A TC LWB is 72″, about the same as the old big-nosed GM crossover sport vans, but 6′ tall and about 190″ long. Parked next to our 2nd-gen Sienna, it’s close in size. The SWB is 16″ shorter and available with the turbo which would address the lack of oomph.
Thanks all for the suggestions. Hopefully I won’t need to replace it anytime soon though the new crash test ratings aren’t great.
The XLT SWB 1.6 wagons aren’t common, I did a lot of clicking to on Ford’s site find one locally.
2014 Ford Transit Connect Wagon. Too bad you cant get it with a manual though.
Sad. It’s a very cool and handy little car. I rented one in Atlanta 2 years ago and put a bunch of miles on it.
Any word if the execution is global, or US only? Looks like Mazda Canada averages somewhere between a quarter and a third of US sales on the 5 yearly, which is well above the average 10% most cars up here sell compared to their American counterpart.
Was wondering the same thing. Why wouldn’t people in countries with dollhose sized paring garages (that’d be anywhere outside North America) want a MINI van with sliding doors?
My hopes for a Mazdaspeed 5 are dashed forever.
I would have been happy with a 2.5L Skyactiv 5.
If they had done a minor Skyactiv treatment, like they did with the previous gen 3, the 5’s economy would have improved enough that it would have a competitive advantage and sold a bit better.
It still wouldn’t be a hit, but maybe enough to continue its existence.
Killer idea! But then, Mercedes only made a few hundred R63’s, but ooo momma!
Good vehicle, but this is the right move for Mazda. They need to focus on 7 core models: 2, 3, 6, CX3, CX5, CX9 and Miata. Anything that distracts attention and investment from that core is a mistake.
What’s a Mazda2?
Subcompact.
It’s practically a bicycle. =)
I’m being facetious because I haven’t seen one in ages.
That’s a bonus for you, as they’re hideous and poor looking, like the Mirage.
I would also suggest they need at least one more dedicated sports car besides the Miata. A Speed3 seems obvious. A Speed6 might work, but a dedicated sports car based on the Miata would be ideal. I don’t think another RX is right at this time, but a new MX model could fit the bill.
Mazda has expressed interest in moving more upscale, and developing a solid GT sports car, it might serve as a halo & give Mazda some aspirational cred. And if Nissan discontinues the Z, they’d have that market to themselves.
I agree that the idea of a car like the Mazda5 is great, but I think the execution is lacking. Besides looking and acting too much like a mini-minivan with the tall body style and sliding side doors, it lacks basic usability like a third seat in the middle row. A more conventional design making the roofline lower with regular doors and without a ride height increase like CUVs would go a long way. Something similar to the Ford Freestyle / Taurus X and less odd looking like the last generation KIA Rondo.
@bts –
Your changes defeat the purpose. It *is* a a 3/4 scale minivan. And the minivan type layout maximizes interior space. And the sliding door? Why would you get rid of that? They’re incredibly useful and make ingress and egress possible in horrible parking lots and securing children in their seat is much easier through the big opening.
Plus when you’re going down the highway you can order your kids to open the doors and pretend you’re flying a Star Wars gunship.
You do that too? My boys wore out the rear window switches on two cars pretending they were triggers for laser guns.
I believe the odd look of the car and sliding doors has led to the low sales. Sure, it may have been more practical, but that has never been enough to maintain consistent sales. Instead of some minor tweaks in the design, they decided to discontinue it all together. The KIA rondo is probably the only player left in the field, and the most recent design makes it a lot less awkward.
Sliding doors are a must.
But, I always wanted our 5 to be wider. I think if it had the dimensions of a Venza (but with conventional Minivan ride height), it could have been a hit.
Come to think of it, there are a few JDM mini-minivans which look good and have sliding doors. The Japanese Honda oddesy for instance is similar in size to a Venza, but it only got sliding doors a couple years ago in a redesign.
Shame, these were quirky. We need more quirky IMHO on our roads these days.
We’ve still got the Juke! :P
I know you were joking, but yeah, the Juke can barely seat 4 comfortably. 5 people makes for a miserable road trip. With luggage, 3 tops, since you’ll have to fold the rear split seat down.
Fun little car, but “people hauler” it ain’t.
+1
The demise of SAAB left our roads almost totally devoid of quirky. The Mazda5 is one of the few remaining examples.
If they had done the Mazdaspeed5, they would have at least 3 more.
Nah, at least one of those would have cannibalized a normal 5 sale.
The 5’s demise has been rumored for some time, this hardly comes as a surprise. The Mazda5’s poor US sales (<14K in 2013) make more sense when compared to FWD station wagons such as the old Mazda6 (<200/month) or VW Sportwagen without TDI (IIRC take rate of 30%, 22.5K sold in 2013). A bunch (44%!) were sold to fleets and sales topped 20K. I could imagine people getting the 5 as a rental minivan, and being totally ticked off when their party of 6 and their luggage didn’t fit.
Our family of 5 has the ’07 Sport, my brother’s family of 4 has the ’08 Touring. Until my eldest was big enough to ride up front, the 3rd row was always in use for child and booster seats. We have taken 400 mile round trips, snug and better done in our Sienna. My brother’s family keeps the 3rd row down unless a grandparent rolls into town. Lifestyle vehicle? He has the roof rack for his bikes, ours does not.
The 2nd row Karakuri seat seen in other markets was not DOT compliant, and I figure that Mazda would have wiped out their NA profit given the cost of engineering such a seat. Doubt having 7 passenger capability would have helped sales, as the Karakuri seat is just slightly wider than a thong. The JDM Premacy got all the goods priced out of the NA market including Skyactiv, i-whatever start/stop, 4WD, power sliding doors, navigation, and tray tables for 2nd row.
Thank you Mazda for bringing the microvan stateside, and giving some of us the chance to own one. I plan on keeping mine for as long as it holds up. If it were only slightly larger, think 1st gen Honda Odyssey with the Magic Seat…
I would say the Japanese sales probably weren’t that great since I’ve seen only one there. Yeah it’s just anecdotal evidence but I’m sure the official numbers aren’t good in any market.
Let’s not beat around the bush, this car is unsaleable after the IIHS test from a month ago:
” The Mazda 5 shares the distinction with two other cars of being the worst-performing models the Institute has evaluated in the small overlap test. The other two are the 2014 Kia Forte, a small car, and the 2012 Prius v, a midsize hybrid.
“When we tested the Mazda 5 we saw a host of structural and restraint system problems. Parts of the occupant compartment essentially buckled, allowing way too much intrusion,” Nolan says.”
The steering wheel went to the righy, legs were crushed and it rated Poor, a de facto fail.
Kind of sums it up. No parent is going to buy one of these to trundle small children around, if they are aware at all. Best to can the model and design a whole new one, if potential sales warrant.
Very true. But it’s also a chicken/egg problem.
Mazda has put zero work into the 5. While other cars have been improved–mileage, safety, etc.–the 5 has gotten none of that. That makes it unsaleable as you noted, and that makes it non-worthwhile to update.
It never really sold well in the first place when it might have been competitive. Sales remained pretty flat in the 20k range in the US for pretty much the entire run. Significant investment to chase that kind of volume would be foolish for a small player like Mazda. They’ve put their money into CUVs where the margins and volume are better.
I mean… Think of the horrors the IHS would unleash on the American motoring public if they tested older cars (2003 – ~2010) with their new small overlap tests and whatnot. All the cars with marginal scores would completely flop. Cars with “Good” scores would suddenly become “dangerous” at the pushing of a large red button marked “Launch sled.”*
Safety ratings… Eh. I guess they are good for comparing apples to apples, but what about last year’s oranges?
* Clearly they use a switch with a plastic cover like on military vehicles, duh. It’d be cooler if it was a large red button, don’t you agree?
I had one as a rental about 9 months ago.
Good riddance, an awful car in all respects.
Tell us how you really feel though!
Me like the Mazda 5. Me sad :-(
Not a fan but I still lament it. I wonder if this would continue if a mfg with deep pockets were producing it instead of Mazda.
Yeah, me too. My recent experience with a rental Mazda5 was a very good one over ~1700 miles roundtrip.
I don’t think it matters who made this niche vehicle. There just aren’t enough sales for it in America.
Last year got a used ’12 because it was dirt cheap.
Good: it fits in the garage, carries 4 people and the stuff better then a CR-V (et al.) and gets 25 mpg at 75 mph.
Bad, at 30k miles it has become a rattle trap.
Wife doesn’t keep up with crash tests so that isn’t a problem.
I searched far and near for one of these in my price range. This is the vehicle for the broke enthusiast with lots of mouths to feed. Seats 6, 29ish MPG, stick, and reliable. I wound up getting a second gen odyssey with a newly installed transmission. They would have sold more of these with the European disappearing middle seat for a tight squeeze of 7.
I have a 2008 and was looking forward to a redesigned model on the latest Mazda platform. I would have bought one new, which is a rare thing for me. Oh well.
I have 2008 Grand Touring. I’ve always enjoyed its uniqueness as part of it’s many charms. It’s my daily driver now, the wife has our newly leased Odyssey EXL.
It isn’t perfect, but it’s not a penalty box either. It isn’t as solid as any Honda or Toyota. But we didn’t pay Honda or Toyota money either. With the GT package, we have the HID lights, leather,heated seats and moonroof. The sliding doors have been great with the kids and our garage. Minuses have been a rather troublesome suspension, an appetite for tires and the thin sheet metal dents easily and some rust is appearing in the lips of the wheel wells. Fair amount of cheap plastic too. But I plan on keeping it until I’m totally sick of it or sick of fixing it, which should be awhile.
We like the extra space and versatility(and power) afforded by our Odyssey though and I haven’t cared for the redesign of the 5 since 2010. Had the diesel made it, it might have been traded on that, since the 2.3 and five speed auto have to work hard in the hills of Pittsburgh.
Glad to have one though, it’s been a decent car and hopefully will serve our needs for a long time to come.
this is tragic, excepting the crash testing thing. this is the perfect urban/semi urban family hauler. can park it anywhere, can drive it over mountain passes with a family of 4 loaded with all our camping gear etc.
I get the business case- if no one buys it, much like the saabs, it doesn’t matter how good’n’practical. It handles so well in the city and zips around. We have had our 2010 grand tourer since new and it has been a gas and oil change car exclusively. I do appreciate the complexity of manually opening the sliding door- our 6 year old can do it just fine. I guess it would be cooler with a motor.
This is emblematic of the need to have much more car than what one needs 98% of the time. To be clear, this is my wife’s family hauler; I lease an s4, so its not like I don’t appreciate nice cars. But the mazda5 was/is really the ultimate sleeper family car, especially for the city dwelling family.
now about that crash test…
Just poked around some. It seems they cut off supply a while ago. The three closest Mazda dealers have a grand total of ONE Mazda5 in stock.
My wife and I both like the Mazda 5. It will be missed!
But, we had the opportunity to buy one and passed. The main reason was that it didn’t have any of the advantages of being small that we were looking for — the MPG is the same as a big van, and so was the price. So, we bought a used Sienna.
There’s certainly a place for a machine like the Mazda 5, but it needs to actually deliver the advantages of being smaller.
P.S. There are a lot of three row crossovers that could fill the niche if the designers would man up and put proper kid-friendly sliding doors on them. I’d even “settle” for properly designed gullwing doors. :-)
When does the new CX-9 come out? Any word on engines?
Weren’t they using Ford’s V6? I haven’t heard word of a Sky V6, so I wonder what will power the thing. No way a 2.5L is going to move that much metal.
They are still working it out. 5 bucks says that they cant replace the engine due to economics and will update everything else. I believe the most prudent and economical thing to do in the long term is to keep the engine with refinements such as start stop and cylinder deactivation this would cost so much. But also thinking economies of scale to introduce a new 8 or 9 speed auto..This will help MPG and also set the up so that three years from now when most of their current stuff needs replacements it will be ready. Even thought is not their engine they still could modify it with not much cost. Those three things together would equal about 2-5 MPG better than now even if they didnt switch platforms. However when they do and combine that with the other suggestions you are looking at finally making the CX9 in the top two or three int he segment as far as MPG go. Right now its at the bottom. However 20/28MPG would help to equal the top players, cuz 16/22 aint working . By the way Mazda dont shrink the gas tank like Ford and Nissan does on their cars..thanks inadvance.
“When does the new CX-9 come out? Any word on engines?”
http://www.autonews.com/article/20140825/OEM04/308259975/mazda-making-big-changes-fast
New CX-9 reported to be targeting 2017, they report a turbo 2.5L I4. (MotorTrend also reported this engine combo.) If they can ever get their diesel up and running, it would be a good choice, too.
Mazda has said they are looking at making a more upscale car, and that would require a 6-cylinder (they said they’re looking at a straight 6 in addition to a V6, but IMO that’s just talk). They set up their new engine manufacturing system with an extra set of machines specifically to produce the current V6. It strikes me as unwise to have built an extra machine setup into their system for an engine type they won’t continue to use. But, SkyActiv was envisioned only around NA 4 cylinders, so either a V6 or a turbo-4 is outside their original design direction.
But aside from a new engine, the CX-9 really needs a diet. They’ve been pushing for a 100 kg reduction on each new model, but they should aim for dropping 200 kg on the CX-9.
I would be really surprised about a turbo 4 for this car. I own an 07 CX9 and it does OK with the Ford v6, but I couldn’t imagine it with less grunt.
I did load it up with about 2500 lbs of cement bags the other day and though it was not a rocket, it got along just fine. Not sure if that’s something one would try with a T4. Actually, it probably isn’t that smart to do to any passenger vehicle.
Also, it has (I believe) a 3000lb tow rating, I presume that would disappear with the engine change. Again, as with the cement hauling stupidity, I doubt that most people tow anything with theirs, I have only towed occasionally. However, it was a nice option to have in the pinch where I needed to rent a box trailer to haul some unexpected junk around.
I wonder if future minvans will be going to T4…
A modern 2.5l turbo four would be expected to have quite a bit more low-end torque than your V6, and at least the cargo-hauling capability and tow rating.
So they’ve only had really ONE CX9 model right? For all these years? I keep seeing newer looking ones, and I think “Wow I thought they dropped that in 2012.” But maybe they’ve just stretched this one model out in Volvo-fashion for way too long.
They redid the sheet metal a couple years ago, but nearly all the mechanicals underneath were unchanged.
Sales have really be dropping off for the CX-9, no doubt because it’s not competitive anymore because of how little work they’ve put into it.
Hmm, so have they been not sure they wanted to continue it? Or just lacking the resources to develop something new (probably more likely)?
That was the only vehicle that Nagare looked good on. RIP.
No! No it did not, not to me. The fat front end, weird surface rippling along the side, and gumpy, dumpy, frumpy horizontal taillights make this one of the uglier vehicles to crawl out of the Nagare swamp. The first generation, however, is a good-looking angular little people mover.
Nagare only looked good on the Furai concept. It’s positively hideous everywhere else.
The first gen 5 looks better than the second in every way.
Bummer but not surprising. Not many people want a minivan that can’t fit both people and cargo at the same time. If you don’t need the third row you have a wagon with a giant cargo hold, but most of those people are just buying CUVs.
The tragically ugly styling of the second generation couldn’t have helped.
It’s exactly what my wife and I wanted when we bought our Sienna.
The problem was that the Mazda 5 burned too much gas and cost too much money, compared to a regular minivan. The size of the Mazda 5 wasn’t the problem (we like small) – it was the lackluster value proposition that came with it.
Also, the Sienna is a worthy competitor whicj sets a high bar. It’s a competitive segment, and young families have to be careful with their dollars.
Honestly if they would have just replaced it with the new platform and made it Hybrid only it would have sold more..or not…It most definitely would have been different, with better MPG. It would have had the segment to its self.
My wife would have been beating down the door for a high MPG mini-minivan.
But our Sienna gets better MPG than the Mazda 5, so it didn’t happen that way.
You see, us green car hippies can read MPG stickers, and the Sienna seems to beat the sticker by a fair bit in the real world, so double win.
As 30-mile fetch stated above, the 2nd generation’s styling is terrible, the prior one looked a lot better. The name “5”, in my opinion, didn’t help either, it should have had something more definitive. Heck, MPV was a pretty clever name, why not reuse that one? Also, many of the 5’s I saw on the road had the all-clear windows as opposed to the dark-tinted ones on the side doors and rear lateral and black glass that most minivans have, and it made them look terrible. I don’t think Mazda gave this model the dedication they should have.
I had the windows tinted in mine. Helped with the typical weak Japanese air conditioning and with the look. And Mazda didn’t give the 5 much attention in the US, I don’t remember ever seeing it in any ads.
The MPV, or now the Mazda8, is still sold in other markets. I don’t think it would have been wise for them to reuse the name while the original is still out there.
The 5 got absolutely no love from Mazda. It was always the last to be updated, and I’m not even sure if the second gen got anything besides new skin. It never got any sort of SkyActiv tech, nor was it ever scheduled to.
It appears that sales have always remained pretty flat in the 20k range for this model, so not too surprising that they wouldn’t choose to refresh it for this market. If you told me it was discontinued in 2010, I would have believed you. I can’t say I’ve seen the a goofy grilled version pictured on the streets.
We just bought a new one of these 3 months back.
Second kid coming. I’m too tall to have two baby seats in the back of almost any midsize and under sedan- so needed something bigger.
We have a narrow garage, so the full size (these things are f’n huge nowadays) minivans wouldn’t work, but we wanted sliding doors.
I had a feeling it wasn’t getting a ’15 update- that it was going to either be discontinued or just dragged on for another year so we pulled the trigger.
Not sure if I could have gotten it cheaper now that the news is out that they’ll be discontinued. I got a pretty screaming deal on it already.
Invoice price, $1000 dealer cash, zero APR, and a good quote on my trade-in. Not paying much more for the GT then I paid for the Sport Mazda 3 hatchback I traded in for it.
I’m a bit of a Mazda enthusiast (this is my third one) but I would have looked at any competition (smaller with sliding doors, sliding rear seats) if they existed.
We looked at a CX-5, and we definitely thought it was a nicer vehicle, but it would be less practical and cost way more.
The crash test does scare me some. Didn’t know about that when I bought it. But nothing to do about that now…
Does anyone know how the Mazda5 sold relative to its predecessor, the MPV? I always thought it was a mistake to cancel the MPV and replace it with the smaller, less practical 5, but I don’t know if sales figures bear this out. Sales of the MPV were never that great (thanks mainly to a poor start due to an underpowered, 2.5L V6 engine) and just got worse as SUVs continued their reign of terror.
That aside, it’s a shame that the small SUV market virtually wiped-out the SWB minivan. It was what made the original 1984 Chrysler minivan such an enormous success because it was right sized and car-like in how it drove, but with a high command view that is so prized these days. Even now, those true, small minivans seem to be a whole lot more practical than either an SUV or what passes for a minivan these days (which are a whole lot closer in size to a full-size van).
The Mazda5 was just too small for a minivan. Combined with the odd sculpting it got with the latest versions, well, it’s not much of a surprise it didn’t sell and is being cancelled.
MPV sales were 17,634 in 2005 and only 11,600 for 2006, the final model year.
Mazda5 sales have been inconsistent from year-to-year, but 2008 was the only year it topped 20k. Here are the raw numbers-
Mazda5
2006- 17,109
2007- 13,717
2008- 22,021
2009- 18,488
2010- 15,683
2011- 19,155
2012- 14,640
2013- 13,884
The 2007 CX-9, introduced in Fall 2006, was Mazda’s intended replacement for the MPV, not the Mazda5.
The Mazda5 was at its most interesting in the 90s, with the All-Sport AWD version thing. I’d like to find one of the loaded ones with leather and a big sunroof (and no rust) but that simply isn’t going to happen.
Then the MPV was like ehhh standard grey minivan rental. I’ve always found the recent to current 5 to be awkward and dorky looking. They look very cheap in most colors and trims, and have very poorly integrated door tracks. I think I’d rather have a Buick Terraza.
The Brown looks better than Greige, which seems to be very popular!
Well this is a bummer. We bought a Mazda5 Sport just over a year ago as I was tired of waiting for the Grand C-Max or TC Wagon to be available and with two kids we needed something small with a 3rd row we could use when grandparents were in town or we had to pick up a neighbor’s kid from school. So far I have only two complaints about the car — the frankly terrifying crash test rating and poor handling in the snow — and the area where I live, just north of Chicago, is positively lousy with them. I keep reading about the low sales rate on the Mazda5 but you’d never know it in Evanston. This town must have bought half of the 5’s ever sold.
Now based on the crash test results and a few white-knuckle experiences in the snow, we’ll be going back to taking our 10 year old Forester on road trips and just driving the 5 around town, and hopefully unloading it in a year or two if I can find a decent replacement.
Unfortunately, nobody else makes the car I want: 3rd row, sliding doors, manual transmission, smaller than an Odyssienna.
Winter tires go a long way on the 5. Those 205/50/17 all seasons they wear,aren’t. I have 205/55/16 snows on mine and it does decent, but certainly not AWD Subie good.
Mazdas with 17″ rims are terrifying on their OEM “all-seasons”. I put Nokian Hakkapelita RSI on my 04 Mazda6 hatch, and it was transformed into an absolute tank.
Hakkajörþrimulskalmöldpelita
So based on a crash test result of the Mazda5 you have more faith in a car from 2004 that was never subject to the same test?
As Eiriksmal said above you’re compairing Apples to oranges.
Buy winter rubber, slow down and if you are about to crash and can not avoid try steering into the crash i.e. use the most amount body to adsorb the energy
It took me months to get rid of a 2008 Mazda5 with 141,000 kilometers (90,000 miles?)… the final price? $4500.
You’d think someone out there wanted a manual minivan.
I always looked at the Mazda 5, but could never bring myself to want it. Correct me if I am wrong, but you couldn’t get the high end features like the OEM HID lamps and such on the MT version.
Basically, A fully loaded, turbo 6MT Mazda 5 would have earned my money.
Not sure about the US, but you could get all the options in Canada with the MT
“You’d think someone out there wanted a manual minivan.”
No, no I wouldn’t.
Did somebody say Brown diesel wagon with a manual transmission? Mazda UK will be happy to sell you a Mazda5 diesel 6 speed in “Titanium Flash”
http://www.mazda.co.uk/car-configurator/?locale=en-gb&vehicle=M5&baseUrl=../car-config-html5/&bodyType=multi_activity_vehicle&grade=sport_venture&engine=1.6%20115%20PS%20Diesel|6%20Speed%20Manual
Seriously, I’m to miss this car because it did what Mazda did best, filling a niche that Toyonda were too big or too beige to go after and making owners happy.
Mazda van above: No. 90s GM Dustbuster van: Oh helllllll yes.
Yes! Dustbusters are real MINIvans with insanely great visibility.
We are currently shopping for a Mazda5, as we only have two kids. The reason? My wife had a hard time driving our 2011 Routan, as it was too big for her.
1. Even with a back-up camera, backed into a car when it was 3 months old.
2. Scraped against our trash can more times than I can count backing out of the garage. The side of the van was not pristine.
3. Broke the passenger side mirror backing out and hitting the edge of the garage.
4. Every corner of the Routan had damage from bumping something.
5. Finally totaled it at less than 44,000 miles. She is currently stuck driving my old Mercury Grand Marquis.
Used Sports (ex-rentals) are all over the place, but I have not yet found the one I like. Figure I’d pocket the $4,000 extra from the insurance settlement.
There was a sales contest – Routan vs. 5. I’m not brand loyal – I buy whatever is giving the best deal at the time.
Other consideration is a Prius V station wagon.
Was the car too big or was her driving skill too small? If she can’t back out of your own garage without taking off the mirrors, she might not need a new car. Leave her in the GM.
“She is currently stuck driving my old Mercury Grand Marquis.”
Great, now she has something even heavier to ram into things! =)
But I can relate to the backup camera incident. I’ve had my Mazda CX-9 for almost two years and I still back into the trash cans every Tuesday morning (trash day) at the end of my driveway. Sometimes I knock them completely across the street! It’s probably because I never look at the stupid display screen. I had rear sonar (beeping) sensors for years and they were far more useful, IMO. Of course, my CX-9 GT is a 2012 and for 2013, they added the rear backup sensors in addition to the camera…..story of my life….
I’d like to pick up a 2011 or later Routan or Town & Country, but they are kind of large, and use a bit of gas, for only having two children.
I guess if I can make her happy with a $15,000 vehicle, then I shouldn’t complain.
T&C does well on highway mileage wise and is really not any worse than the fake trucks equipped with AWD for city driving. Get a model with stow and go so your rear area is always ready for the inevitable cargo which accompanies a small family.
This, the Chrysler vans average as good or better fuel economy than most midsize to large crossovers, really anything that approaches the space efficiency. The price of entry is much much lower too.
Evanston resident here as well and current owner of an ’05 Mazda3 hatchback. Winter driving was equally poor for us as well. While I strongly advocate a change in tire, I don’t think you need to get a dedicated winter tire to resolve your issues. I put all-season Nokian tires on our Mazda with great results (now on set #2). They’re somehow both an all-season tire AND rated as a snow tire, I’m not familiar with any other brand of tire that can say the same thing. Obviously not a tremendous dry weather performer, but this tire has otherwise been an excellent solution for us.
Where did you get these magical tires? I don’t see Nokian tires listed on tirerack.com.
Go to the Nokian Tires website and click on the where to buy link. Discount Tire, among other chains, may carry them. I have never had them on a car, but I hear great things about them. I think Davefromcalgary is familiar with the brand.
Correct. I have run Nokian WR (And WR-G2, they are now on to the WR-G3 which I haven’t had) for many years.
They are great tires, but they are a compromise tire. I don’t have room to store a spare set of rims and tires, so I generally use them. In the summer they are noisier than an all season, and in the winter a car with top spec winters will generally have better grip on really crappy surfaces like heavy snow, slush, deep snow or rutted uneven surfaces (due to more aggressive, blocky tread), but they truly are a winter tire that provides useful, progressive winter grip, you truly can run them year round and they are far and away more safe than a non severe service rated all season.
I believe they use a softer compound, but not AS soft as a true winter. As well, they depend on a very asymmetric design, which allows quieter running, less tread wear and less sloppiness in handling than a true, blocky winter tread. The key is the severe service symbol, there are minimums that must be met to bear that logo on any tire. I believe that Nokian is right on the edges of the boundaries of certain design charecteristics.
For instance, it seems Nokian really toes the line on a compound that retains some pliability in below freezing temps, but is still hard enough to last through the summer. You can really dig your thumb into a blizzak or a hakkapellita, not so much a WR.
I recommend them to anyone who wants better winter grip but cannot afford/doesn’t have room to store dedicated winters, and have never had any complaints about their performance. The only complaint, which is fair to be sure, is that they advertise 100,000 kms life time and generally they are done by 80,000 kms. That and they are definitely priced like a top flight winter tire, though I have always considered the price worth paying for year round confidence.
Not sure why TR doesn’t carry them, but noticed the same unfortunate thing when it came to buy set #2. A local shop that carried them recommended them to us otherwise I would have never heard of them.
You can find a list of retailers through their website, http://www.nokiantires.com. Via a google search, seems like discounttire may carry them too.
I live in Evanston too, I was asking which shop :) Did you get them at Rolf’s? They are listed as a dealer on Nokian’s site.
Ha – your question makes a lot more sense to me now. We got the Nokian tires recommendation from the Duxler Skokie location. For a while I preferred them over the Evanston location but it just doesn’t pay to make the trip all the way out there and back.
I still think winter tires are a reasonable solution if he has room to store them. Winter tires and wheels for my C-Max set me back less than $500. When I have to replace the original equipment tires that I use outside of winter (hopefully 4 more years), they should cost me less than that too. I think the Mazda5 needs 16″ wheels, so it may costs him just over $500. The Nokians only make sense if his current tires are getting to the end of the line.
I just took at look at the current pricing on TrueCar.com for a new Mazda5. In my area (North Georgia)-
Sport AT- $17,164 ($4,771 off MSRP)
Grand Touring AT- $20,584 ($4,881 off MSRP)
and 0% APR for 60-months, too!
Heck of a deal for anyone who wants/needs a mini-minivan…
Bummer. We’ve had our 2012 for 3 years now. Just paid it off.
Totally understand. Even as the perfect target market for it (enthusiast, cheap, 2 kids), it still leaves much to be desired. Ours was 19k new, but I would’ve paid 25 for a speedier, less stripped version that kept the stick.
Unless we have a 3rd kid we’ll probably just keep it forever and drive it into the ground.
Good to see Mazda5 is still available for 2015 and they FINALLY made the cup holders standard in all models. I worked at a Mazda dealership and repeatedly told Mazda Canada to put the cup holders in the second row. They were previously only available on the GT on the 1st generation models and GT with luxury package for the 2nd gen. We actually had them installed on a used GS but it took some fabrication and too much money. I drove a 2009 for my demo and liked it a lot. My only complaints were the driver’s seat would not go back as far as I wanted and the seat itself was too short to offer enough thigh support for extended trips. I loved the ease of parking, light sliding doors and rear lift gate, good fuel mileage, sporty handling, available manual transmission, and versatile interior. Its a shame that Mazda did not advertise this vehicle enough and some potential customers wouldn’t give it a second look. Consumer Reports gives it glowing reviews (much better than average reliability) and rated it as the best overlooked vehicle. My wife has been driving a 2003 Honda van since 2004 and I’m planning to get her in a Mazda5 in the spring.
Just looked at Mazda USA site and the Mazda5 is missing from the lineup. Looks like we Canadians get it but its no longer being sold in the US.
It’s not dead, the 2015 is listed on their website, so this article is incorrect.
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage.action?pageParameter=modelsMain&vehicleCode=MZ5